Newer cars build quality

Italian quality isn't what it used to be.

 

I don't profess to be an expert but I had never considered owning a Ferrari because of their reputation for poor build quality, constant repairs and astronomical repair bills.

I talked with a 360 owner years ago and he told me that had slowly changed especially with the 360. I have a 430 now. One reason I bought it was because the people on this site touted its reliability.

 

I think the exact opposite as well.

I have for the past two years turned the key, driven the car and put it away with no problems. Everybody I speak with expects the opposite.. was set by earlier cars lack of build quality.

 

Build quality compared to the 328 is light years in difference to the new cars. New cars are 1,000% better.

What I find funny sometimes is how people "rave" over the Dino. I had one. The Dino build quality was something that would be acceptable in 1965. The only problem is it was built in 1971. The cockpit felt like the heat was always on, the gauges would read 15% lower as soon as you put on the lights, the mechanical levers for heating and ventilation stuck, the electric windows would take over 30 seconds to close, and you could jump start the car in about 10 seconds by pulling a few wires off the back of the ignition lock. The trunk lid was 1/8 of an inch LONGER than the body it fit on.

Yes, the car had character but to be honest, the quality was far from the acceptable standards of the time.

Part of the reason for good build quality today is better engineering, better technology, and competition. The cars are also a lot more expensive now.

I sold quite a few 308/328's when I had my shop in the late 80's. Everyone who walked in to look at one had the same question: Why does it cost so much because the paint and finish is so poor? Look at these tiny switches and stalks. It looks like they would break just by looking at them. And the AC-- is that as cold as it gets? Are they all like that?

The answer is yes, they are all like that. When you pay for a Ferrari, what you pay for are the body shape, the engine, and the badge. What you don't pay for are reliability, finish, creature comfort, and paint.

So, with all due respect Bullfighter: you don't know what you're talking about. Don't confuse character with quality.

 

I felt my 360 and 430 interiors were sparse, but the only parts I felt were cheap were all things related to the sound system. I never thought the fit and finish or durability seemed suspect.

 

I had a 328 and 430 at the same time for about 7 years. 430 interiors hold up extremely well. My car, which I bought new, now has 22K on it and is still like new inside (as it should be). 328s held up very well also but it is a different era. I still have the 430 but sold the 328 only because I wasn't driving it much anymore. Neither car could hold a candle to the build quality of a contemporary Toyota or Honda.

Dave

 

I think I better understand your point now. My experience with modern Ferraris is all through my friends and my mechanics as the last Ferraris to stoke my desire where the 550/355. That being said, the reliability, build quality, ease of maintenance, and service demands of a modern Ferrari are infinitely better than they were even ten or so years ago.

The lack of "solidity" you refer to is something I have noticed across the board in modern sports cars. The doors don't have that vault like thud when you close them and the components, such as the switchgear and latches lack the feeling of mechanical certainty you have with the older cars. The quality of some of the plastic switch gear is also lacking, to the extent it has started a cottage industry in upgrading/repairing the parts. Of course, let's not let our critiques of modern Ferrari cause us to lose sight of the shortcomings of past Ferraris. All the Ferraris of the FIAT era have switch gear that appears to have come right out of the fiat parts bin and what wasn't swathed in leather was manufactured of cheap plastic. If you compare the interior quality of a Ferrari to a Mercedes of the same era...you would swear the Mercedes cost twice as much.

Ferrari also built cars that had silly maintenance requirements and engines that had seals that leaked as soon as you pulled the car off the showroom floor.

Ferraris used to be truly handmade, and that is a blessing and a curse, especially when you are talking about a small boutique Italian auto company putting out a few thousand cars a year.

We can debate whether Ferrari lost its soul, its identity, its blah blah blah, but if there is one thing Luca did right, it was to put R&D into making cars that were more reliable and easier to maintain. If you have any doubt, spend some time in a California...its the Ferrari the Germans would build.

As always, just my .02

 

Anyone who thinks 80's interior parts are superior to today's interior parts hasn't

1) Seen a 308 light stalk (it's a joke -- and replacing one now is unobtainium)

2) Seen 348/355 "sticky" buttons

3) Seen warped or shrunk leather dashes on just about every car made from 1980 to 2000

4) Seen the cheezy/cheap Fiat parts bin switchgear on just about every car Ferrari made in the 80's.

Dave however is right about them not holding up well. You don't get that butter soft skin and durability. My Maserati is 12 years old and the leather looks new. It's rare to say that with Ferrari but the Ferrari leather is much, much softer.

 

I think this is a problem with new cars in general is it not? They tend to be very reliable very quiet smooth powerful with great power and economy but the interior quality may be hit or miss and certainly the electrical is more complicated which can make for big headaches and then you have the things like doors etc. I recently bought an old truck and while very primitive some of the materials used have a quality feel (very little plastic lots of metal etc)

 

GM switches have the consistency of recycled water bottles. The more you touch 'em the shinier they get.

One Ferrari idea is race-grade switch units and the satisfying finality of metal.

The most expensive rotary knob or pressure button in the world would be so tactile.....vulcanized plastics, potentiometers with sealed bearings instead of bent tabs/molded bumps for traction. Crud wipes easy too. Gaps where you can't see the crud that got past. This production car retails for $1 million dollars standard with 1000-year/final solution controls.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

Just you. My F-car and thinking about all my cars past and present, build quality of modern cars is far far far better than cars even just from the 70s and maybe a little into the 80s. Tooling is just far better as are assembly processes even for hand built cars.

 

A friend of mine worked at a shop where they installed entertainment systems in Ferrari's, amongst other cars.
He told me something once, " You don't buy a Ferrari because of build quality or durability, you buy a Ferrari because you can ".

 

The disposable gets restored and the unrestorable gets disposed.
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

WOW!!!!....MILLIONS & MILLIONS of cars made between 1980 thru 2000, & according to bob..."just about every car made" had a warped or shrunk dash....Has there ever been a MORE blanket statement made???!!!....I guess the "Perfect" dash on my 1991 Testarossa is the "LONE EXCEPTION".....everyone else is SCREWED!!.....Mark

 

It's not a blanket statement.. more of an accurate generality.

The last few RedHeads that I saw had a pulling leather on the dash, the pod. Various other locales in the interior... etc. A cliche is doesn't become a cliche if it's rare. You are a lucky man!

 

I guess my winking emoticon wasn't big enough.

I think you're noticing the universal shift to plastics and lighter materials, which gives cars a sort of chintzy feel. I've been in most Ferrari models from the Dino/Boxer era through the F430 (haven't driven a 458), and from a tactile perspective the Enzo-era cars have a more satisfying feel. Porsche followed a similar pattern -- metal instrument panels, chromed gauges, all-steel construction gave way to the Camry-ized interiors of the 986/996 series. My first longer drive in a 356 coupe (not mine) was a revelation: no rattles, little plastic, lots of chrome and painted metal, very mechanically satisfying. It oozes craftsmanship and character and feels unbreakable.

The other factor is that if you look back to the 250 GT series up through the Boxer/328, Ferrari used body-on-tubular frame construction for all or most all of its cars. The 348 was a uni-body car, and with the 360 the body was an Alcoa project. From a quality perspective, that means the newer cars got lighter and offer equal and probably better crash protection, but closing the door on a 360 feels like swishing a piece of paper, whereas the door on a 328 is a substantial thing. Perception.

Perception aside, very few cars from the "golden age" were really all of that. I own a 1950s Porsche, and compared to its contemporaries the 356 was a car that you could actually set out and arrive in without much adventure. But remember they all had tool kits -- not for concours lawn display but because you needed to tinker with stuff. Alfas, Ferraris and Jags to a much greater extent. (Of course the tool kits were of very high quality...) And you're lucky to get 100K miles out of an engine. And plan on a lot of valve adjustments along the way.

 

I know it's not an F-car, but visit the Corvette museum some time. Fun trip. Anyway there you can see museum-quality all original cars from a few decades ago and witness the relatively poor build quality. Whereas a modern corvette still (same as in the past) has poor materials, at least the build quality (fit & finish and what not) is really good.

My understanding is that when folks "restore" a car from the past, the build quality of the restoration is generally many levels above original.

 

Thank you for actually understanding what was written. But apparently

I need MORE !!!!!!!!! or else SOME ONE will NOT UNDERSTAND what I am SAYING!!!!!!!!

I'll say it one last time and I dare anyone to disagree: Build quality of Italian cars in the 1980's to mid 90's sucked across the board. We all know it and we deal with the issues every day on this forum by the people who still love them through the pain.

 

Have to agree regarding the California. As the owner of an decent condition 308 who had the opportunity to take a short drive in a California, the build quality of that car is way ahead of mine. Though I do love the 308, I'd trade it in a second for the California (even though I do think the 308 looks better )

 

I disagree. I don't know what if any experience you have with the testarossa, but it is exceptionally well built and very reliable. I remain astonished that a boutique car manufacturer was capable of building a car of that caliber. Mechanics will tell you that properly maintained they will run forever. Compared to other 1980s cars, they may not be Porsche, but the build quality was very respectable.

 

We aren't talking about reliability. We're talking about build quality. (Although, it appears you haven't owned it long!)

Anyone who thinks today's paint on Ferrari's is worse than it was in the 1980's needs glasses. Anyone who thinks sticky buttons are preferable to today's non-sticky ones please raise your hand (I don't see any). Anyone who thinks the AC on an 80's car was "good" for it's time, please show me the kool-aid you're drinking to stay cool on an average summer day. Anyone who thinks the 80's had good electronics and switches and "gizmo's", please have your heads examined.

Stupid "mouse track" seat belts, fuse boxes that burn out, window switches that stop working, rust from doing nothing more than "the crime" of washing them (heaven forbid running them in the rain), various oil leaks, HVAC systems that just quit one day, thermostatic fans switches that don't turn on, cars that won't start because they are too warm -- the list goes on and on.

Every Italian car make suffered.

 

I would venture to say, Build quality & Reliabilty, go "hand in hand". What example can you give of something that was built poorly, yet was reliable, the two are diametrically opposed to one another....no !!!! were used so bob can hopefully understand.....Mark